Neuromonitoring During Surgery for Paediatric Spinal Deformity in Canada (2007)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Neuromonitoring during paediatric (and adult) spinal deformity surgery helps to reduce the risk of both permanent and short term neurological damage. A shortage of neurophysiologists and technicians limits the availability of this service. Not all surgeons believe neuromonitoring offers neuroprotection during spinal surgery. This study aimed to document the degree to which paediatric patients undergoing spinal deformity correction surgery have their spinal cord function monitored. METHODS: A questionnaire was sent electronically to all of the surgical members of the Canadian Paediatric Spinal Deformity Study Group. RESULTS: Results were received from 9/9 centres indicating that monitoring was performed in 7/9 centres, with one further centre awaiting staffing. Whilst half of those centres that do monitor only monitor sensory and motor evoked potentials, the remaining centres also use EMG and EEG to assess the state of the patient intraoperatively. CONCLUSIONS: Despite a shortage of staff, most paediatric spinal deformity surgeons in Canada who wish to, are able to neurophysiologically monitor their surgical cases. Neuromonitoring appears to be becoming a standard of care, at least for paediatric spinal deformity surgery. There is an urgent need for the establishment of national standards for both technologists and interpreters, as well as training programmes for both these groups.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".